[YLUG] recovering partition table

[Roger Leigh]

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 02:20:09PM +0100, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> Thank for the advice.
> 
> I guess that the partitions are still OK.
> I run testdisk
> et fdisk gives:
> /dev/sdd1               1         305     2449881   82  Linux swap /
> Solaris
> /dev/sdd2             306        9726    75674182+   f  W95 Ext'd (LBA)
> /dev/sdd5             306         732     3429846   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd6             733        1733     8040501   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd7            1734        2342     4891761   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd8            2343        2953     4907826   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd9            2954        3318     2931831   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd10           3319        3499     1453851   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd11           3500        5900    19286001   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd12           5901        6901     8040501   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd13           6902        8102     9647001   83  Linux
> /dev/sdd14           8103        9726    13044748+  83  Linux

This is meaningless.  That could be correct or incorrect and we
could not tell.  It's just a bunch of numbers.  It might be
technically correct, but if it changed from your previous setup,
then you will have lost your old partitions.

How are your "guessing" that they are OK?  What have you done to
verify the fact?

> fsck -r /dev/sdd5 gives:
> 
> fsck 1.41.4 (27-Jan-2009)
> e2fsck 1.41.4 (27-Jan-2009)
> fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...

So /dev/sda5 doesn't contain a valid filesystem (no superblock).  There
are two possibilities:

1) Your filesystem is badly corrupted
2) Your partition table is incorrect

> So, I think that the best would be to make a dd if=/dev/sdd5 of=/tmp/sdd5
> (and so on for each partitions), but I failed in dd because I guess
> that I am do giving the right count !

*NO* *NO* If your partition table is screwed you cannot copy the partitions,
only the whole disk.  The point being, you're not backing up the original
partition, just a random chunk of your disc.

> Than I could do either a mount of the file (if it recognize the type)
> or a fsck of the file ?

You haven't told us what you did to break it, nor done what I asked in
my other mail (file -s), so advising you further is not possible until
you do so.


Regards,
Roger

-- 
  .''`.  Roger Leigh
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux             http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
 `. `'   Printing on GNU/Linux?       http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
   `-    GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848   Please GPG sign your mail.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/york/attachments/20090725/32c23707/attachment.pgp